About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
today, that the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case, the perry case, as well as the doma case. and, you know, look, when this case was filed almost four years ago, the prop 8 case, we made the case in court that in this country we don't deny our citizens a fundamental right, and the supreme court has called marriage a fundamental right no less than 14 times in the history of this country, and i'm optimistic that once the court does hear this case and the doma case, they're going to come down on the side of freedom, liberty, and equality just as they have so many times in our nation's past. >> and equal protection of the laws. elizabeth, thank you for coming on. equal protection of the laws. lib cert a pretty profound notion in this country. >> it is 37. >> pursuit of happiness is our declaration. why not? >> here is the thing, if you are gay and alive in our time in america, we're living in a kind of a policy and civil rights renaissance. we have seen extraordinary leadership from other parts of government already. don't we judge, chris, presidents by whether they stand up to the m
to consider choosing and two prop 8 ones. they have one doma and one prop 8. >> what's fascinating, this is a court that has avoided this issue. it's been pathological. everyone in lawrence v. texas, the opinion was distorted in my ways because of a clear effort not to say anything that would have baring on the same-sex marriage issue. suddenly, they take two issues with the broadest possible front. the question is, what are they going to do and whether they are going to reach an impasse. if there's an impasse, sometimes they go for narrow decisions. there are outs in these cases. both cases have standing issues. questions of whether these are the party that is have a right to bring this type of challenge. the standing issues are particularly prominent in the doma case. the proposition 8 case probably offers the broadest scope for a major ruling. what people, many people hope, is that that would be the case where the court says this violates equal protection. you can't deny these people the same rights of marriage. if it were to do that, then it would effectively set aside 31 state
a decision that's down the road. there's a variety of different ways they could decide on doma. you know, they don't have to decide on equal protection grounds but the narrow question of benefits or certain benefits or certain tax breaks that married people who happen to be same sex should get or shouldn't get. so, there's a whole range of ways they could consider this. it doesn't mean they're just going to go in and determine that a law against same-sex marriage is illegal discrimination. there are a lot of other things they can do with it. >> benefits are one thing. recognition and allowance is another thing. here's the other thing. it is real hard to get breaking material and information out of the supreme court before they're ready to give it but on occasion good connections yield something and yet a lock-up in terms of what they might do with prop 8 and doma. >> yeah. that's true. but you have to remember, on these big, sweeping social issues that the court has decided throughout history, desegregation of public schools comes to mind, brown versus the board of education, that sat on
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)